Local spaying/neutering providers wary of House bill

Alice Anderson carries a dog to be sterilized at the Anderson County P.A.W.S animal shelter on Tuesday. Proposed legislation that would prohibit sterilizing privately-owned animals with public money would not affect the shelter.

Anderson Independent Mail

A bill backed by the state's veterinary trade group could dissuade people from using low cost spaying and neutering services, according to local rescue groups.

H. 3284 would prevent private shelters, such as Oconee and Anderson's local humane societies, from using public dollars to spay or neuter animals brought to them by private owners. Several state groups are mounting opposition to the proposed bill, written at the request of the South Carolina Association of Veterinarians.

The bill would require that animal shelters receiving tax dollars use them only for sterilizing animals in the shelter, that some veterinary services at shelters be restricted to low-income users and that shelters be regulated by the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation and the Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners.

Rescue and shelter groups complain that some sections of the bill seem to apply to government-related shelters, while others apply to nonprofit groups.

The Anderson County Humane Society currently invoices the county for animals it spays or neuters, whether or not they are collected by animal control officials or brought in by private individuals unable to afford to pay veterinary clinics for the services.

"I'm not particularly worried about us," said Wanda Crane, who runs the Anderson County Humane Society. "We're invoicing the county for each surgery, not getting a chunk of money every year."

Crane questions the need for the change, however.

"We're pretty much against it ... they (veterinarians) are targeting us because they truly think we are taking away from their practices' money," Crane said. "The people we see here are not ever going to see veterinarians because they can't afford them."

The concerns aren't limited to Anderson County, either.

"Clearly we are quite concerned and are following the developments," said Suzanne Daddis, adoption manager for the Oconee County Humane Society in Seneca. "We don't see that shelters and rescue groups benefit from being in competition with veterinarians.

"We are hoping that things get worked out so that what we do as a nonprofit can remain."

Reps. Kirkman Finlay of Richland and David Hiott of Pickens sought opinions last week at a closed-door meeting that included veterinarians and advocacy groups including the Charleston Animal Society.

"The (state's) veterinary group believes it was very positive," wrote Dr. Pat Hill in a recent statement. "As a result most of the shelter community now understands that their ability to provide sterilization services would be unaffected by the legislation."

A Seneca veterinarian agrees with that assessment.

"I am sure that here are some procedures being done by nonprofessionals in some shelters," said Dr. Roger Ross, a Seneca veterinarian and owner of Fox Nest Veterinary Hospital. "We all want what's best for the animal and the pet owner."

Ross says he has a good working relationship with the Oconee County Humane Society and its operation of the county animal shelter.

"Our goal here continues to be to adopt as many animals as possible and to reduce the euthanasia rate to zero," Daddis said. "Granted, most veterinarians have not spend much time in an animal shelter, but our dialogue and working relationship is very positive here in Oconee."

The current bill is not at all certain to get before both legislative chambers this session and may have to wait until next year, according to observers.